HTC Highroad faces meltdown as cycling's doping problems deter sponsors

With all due respect, Cavendish talking about training on the Essex lanes, with Dowsett, is no more a slip, or a revelation, than news about his his training in Italy with BMC's Sciandri and Phinney would be.. or even his travelling from Quarrata to this year's edition of the Tour de Suisse in one of BMC's liveried Skodas – all parties involved were very publicly tweeting about it as it happened. I really doubt there is any more significance to it than that they get on.

As for Highroad: Stapleton's plan B is almost certainly to merge the team with another team.. and to do that comfortably he needs to shed riders. I suspect he is just making sure that all interested parties are aware that all contracts are potentially negotiable.

If doping causes teams sponsors to run off, deystroying eams and give the sport a bad name that makes the fight agaisnt doping even more cause

I'd also argue that the popularity of road cycling as a participation sport and a spectator sport has never been bigger despite the doping over the last few decades.

While scandals may not affect how fans think about a product or service, it is actually the companies who sponsor who are sensitive. A lot want to present a positive image, look how sponsors of footie thugs like Roonie get the shakes everytime he's seen with a woman over 50. And I would say positive image is MASSIVE in the states, surely the home of spin and BS. Big corps just don't want to be seen associatted with a negative media image in whatever form that may come from.

As said above though I think for Bob and HTC one problem is very probably the loss of Cav. The whole team have done an amazing job but at the end of the day Cav is the focus of attention, especially for the layman follower.

I'd say it's damage limitation as news leaks that maybe Cav is moving Sky-ward. Once Cav drops in a few stage victories at Le Tour next week i'm sure things will change. Going slightly off topic - I'm not sure Cav will even go. Would he want to leave his best mucker, Bernie Eisel? What about the lead out train that has helped him win all these stages? Martin, Renshaw, Eisel are part of a very well oiled lead out team for Cav and now Andre Greipel is no longer at Highroad, Cav is certainly happier there even if there wouldn't be much love lost between Cav and Bob Stapleton if Cav were to go. I think maybe it's a bit of publicity prior to the tour.

Although doping isn't very good publicity for riders and other riders in that team, but does it really affect a sponsor? I'd say that, that level of publicity is at least column inches in the press which is ultimately why a big corporate sponsors a team in the first place. Sponsors seem very good at extracting themselves from any connections with doping whilst still remaining behind the team, so i don't think it's relevant. As Sean says, it's a non story.

We're shopping for flooring, and for me, Quickstep is a plus - good floors and sponsor cycling. The missus likes the floors too, so job done.

Yes doping will matter to companies - not because they think that people will cancel subscriptions should Sky have a calamity, but because association tarnishes the brand. Brand marketing is crucial and to be associated with the bad publicity is not viewed as a wise investment by companies.

Hmm rumormill has Starbucks as lead sponsor of Leopard-Trek.

If true that tells me there are definitely major lorage corporate companies out there willing to sponsor cycling teams..

HTC apparently are more interested in sponsorship of Cav and all the negative comments over Cav's contract at Highroad cannot helped things.

I think we need to remember that this is a US team. From what I can gather the whole Lance Armstrong investigation is getting serious media coverage - if anything comes of that then I would expect a whole host of US sponsors to pull out of the sport (or at least those for whom growth in the US market is their core aim - Garmin probably wouldn't give a toss!).

a LAY-o-pard, i think you mean

seriously though, i've got an HTC phone. and while the cycling sponsorship aspect isn't the only criterion – it helps that their phones are very good – it certainly made me more charitably disposed to the brand when i was picking a new handset.

A 'LEO-pard', surely?

I get all my pre-coated steel from Lampre and my gas from Astana (probably...)

I going to get my insurance and pensions from Ag2r-La Mondiale

I've just seen the "interview" on BBC News, If i was the head of a company like HTC and he spouted the figures he mentioned at me, i'd be snapping his arm off to sponsor the team, but i'm not sure the figures are right

He said 6 billion viewers of the big tours?
165 million cycling enthusiasts in western europe and america??

The enthusiasts big might be correct, but then break it down to how many are road bike enthusiasts, MTB and so on, i think you'll find the numbers to be far lower and then factor in 18 UCI pro teams all with sponsorships, all the different brands and components ect. Ok its not going to be an even split of fans, but some teams will attract more fans than others, so the number of enthusiasts that might be a fan of your team and there for brand, is decreased even more.

Then take a brand like HTC, who specialize in Mobile device's, phone, PDA and Tablets, are the CYCLING enthusiasts really that concerned about having a mobile device just because its from the company their favourite rider is from? I would guess no.

That point above is simpler to quantify when you take into account the few teams that have a bike manufacturers in their name, Leopard TREK, Liquigas CANNONDALE, Garmin CERVELO, Its more likely that CYCLING enthusiasts want the bike their fav rider uses, Even better in the case of Garmin, have the bike and gps your rider uses.

I dont really know where my point was heading after writing all that, but it seems more sensible to have a manufacturer as your MAIN sponsor and in your team name that any other sponsor. I still stand by what i said above about the riders leaving, so less well known riders being left will attract less offers of sponsorship and i dont think that sponsorship is effected by a rider being caught doping and if it is effected, its not the whole sport, mainly the team and sponsors he/she rides for.

Impact of drugs turns spectators of the sport, but sponsors?

If Team Sky were found to be doping would people cancel their SKy subscription? Hardly.

Surely in this economic climate there's always some, probably unethical and immoral, organisation happy to have their brand name publicised. Take football for instance, casino's, gambling, beer companies are the big money spinners.

It's not so much drugs as the dire state of the US economy surely.

Could this be a pre-emptive statement after news leaked that Cav is going to Sky, so will likey want to take his lead out train with him, Goss and Renshaw, leaving HTC quite weak in "bigger" name guys, so less likey to attract a big name sponsor

I disagree that doping puts sponsors off, because has anyone in HTC ever been done with doping? Yes the image of cycling might get damaged if Contador gets banned, but its not a one man sport and just because one person does something wrong, it doesn't mean the whole peloton is at it

Non story. Bob could easily fund the team from his own pocket, he's just upping the ante as August approaches and teams can announce their rosters for 2012.